Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Good Governance Initiative (GGI) #40

Merged
merged 16 commits into from
Jan 25, 2024

Conversation

fioddor
Copy link
Contributor

@fioddor fioddor commented Oct 12, 2023

Helps: InnerSourceCommons/ispo-working-group#40

The ISPO-WG suggested to include a governance section.
I've created a draft for review. I haven't yet linked this page from the TOC.

governance/governance.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link
Contributor

@rrrutledge rrrutledge left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Just a few changes? Almost ready 🎉 !

governance/governance.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
governance/governance.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
governance/governance.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
governance/governance.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
governance/governance.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
governance/governance.md Show resolved Hide resolved
governance/governance.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
governance/governance.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
fioddor and others added 2 commits October 29, 2023 13:33
Co-authored-by: rrrutledge <rrrutledge@users.noreply.github.com>
@fioddor fioddor requested a review from a team as a code owner October 29, 2023 12:39
fioddor and others added 6 commits October 29, 2023 13:55
This is meant to be printed on paper, where hyperlinks don't work.
Co-authored-by: Sebastian Spier <github@spier.hu>
The reasons for fostering usage were mentioned but their relation to the topic may not have been clear.
spier
spier previously requested changes Oct 29, 2023
Copy link
Member

@spier spier left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Great work @fioddor!

I don't have enough content to assess if the content is fit for purpose.
Therefore I kept my review focused on structure, formatting, etc

A couple of changes that I pushed myself:

  • updated this PR with the latest content from the main branch
  • also ran the spell/style checks on the content (see inline annotations)
  • included the governance file to the ToC in SUMMARY.md, so that it will get included in the book (once we merge this branch)

See other comments inline.

governance/governance.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
governance/governance.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
governance/governance.md Show resolved Hide resolved
governance/governance.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Comment on lines +255 to +267
[^1]: http://oss-watch.ac.uk/resources/governancemodels

[^2]: https://ospo-alliance.org/ggi/

[^3]: https://github.com/InnerSourceCommons/InnerSourcePatterns

[^4]: https://github.com/InnerSourceCommons/InnerSourcePatterns/blob/main/patterns/1-initial/introducing-metrics-in-innersource.md

[^5]: https://innersourcecommons.org/

[^6]: https://github.com/InnerSourceCommons/InnerSourcePatterns/blob/main/patterns/1-initial/code-consumers.md

[^7]: https://ospo-alliance.org/ggi/activities/open_source_procurement_policy/
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Do we have to link via footnotes, or could we add links to the content directly?
Personally I would find it easier to use the links if they were included in the content directly.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

That's because you read it on a device. But this was meant to be a book with copies printed on paper, where hyperlinks don't work.

I've seen other pages (like the introduction/framework or the infrastructure chapter) providing clickable inline links, but most of the introduction chapter seems to go for footnotes, so I don't know.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

... this was meant to be a book with copies printed on paper, where hyperlinks don't work.

That is interesting. Is this information captured in writing somewhere, or information you got through the bitergia connection? ❤️

Also @rrrutledge what's your take on this?

Assuming that our current goal here is to publish an online book (and not a printed book), my preference would be to go for regular hyperlinks, rather than footnotes.

However for the moment it does not matter much either way. We can also leave them as footnotes for now and decide later what we want to do with them.

governance/governance.md Show resolved Hide resolved
governance/governance.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
governance/governance.md Show resolved Hide resolved
@spier
Copy link
Member

spier commented Oct 29, 2023

@fioddor one more question:
Is your content in this PR an extension of what is already included in the book here?

@fioddor
Copy link
Contributor Author

fioddor commented Oct 29, 2023

@fioddor one more question: Is your content in this PR an extension of what is already included in the book here?

Yes.

Co-authored-by: Sebastian Spier <github@spier.hu>
@fioddor
Copy link
Contributor Author

fioddor commented Oct 29, 2023

Great work @fioddor!

Great review too, @spier. Thanks for automating the spell check. I was leaving the rebase and the TOC for the end but I guess this is already maturing and although the TOC is prone to conflicts, these should be clear to handle! :-)

@spier
Copy link
Member

spier commented Oct 29, 2023

@fioddor one more question: Is your content in this PR an extension of what is already included in the book here?

Yes.

Got it.

How to integrate the new content into that existing page?
Do you have any thoughts or preferences with regards to that?

As a simple integration one could link from Framework/Governance to this more detailed new page about Governance.
Although that does not seem like a fully coherent solution.

@rrrutledge
Copy link
Contributor

How to integrate the new content into that existing page?

It would be good for them to relate in some holistic way. Minimum linking between them so they acknowledge each other.

@rrrutledge
Copy link
Contributor

@akritiko will have a look as well!

Copy link
Contributor

@rrrutledge rrrutledge left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Very valuable!

governance/governance.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

Dependency management needs to take care of both:
- Internal InnerSource dependencies
- Dependencies on privative software and services (usually
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

What do you mean by privative? I don't understand (even after looking up the word).

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Oops. This is a false friend: In spanish, privativo is a stronger variant of private, a way to refer to propietary software stressing the fact that it deprives its users of certain rights.

Words like propietary and property stress ownership (control by the owner) while private stresses deprivation (for others).

Would private software work in english?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Ah, no problem! We’ll figure out the right wording! What would be the difference “proprietary software” and “internal InnerSource software”?

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

stressing the fact that it deprives its users of certain rights.

Restricted?

Co-authored-by: rrrutledge <rrrutledge@users.noreply.github.com>
@jeffabailey
Copy link
Collaborator

@fioddor

Do you have time to follow up on this PR?

It looks like it needs a few changes and may make it over the finish line soon.

If no, I recommend we merge this PR and do further cleanup based on requested changes in another PR.

Any objections?

@rrrutledge
Copy link
Contributor

Sounds great, @jeffabailey

@jeffabailey jeffabailey dismissed spier’s stale review January 25, 2024 02:43

Since this branch is currently abandoned, I'm merging this in and we can finish the work to better integrate the content in a follow-up PR.

@jeffabailey jeffabailey merged commit d4b0771 into InnerSourceCommons:main Jan 25, 2024
1 check passed
@fioddor fioddor deleted the governance branch April 8, 2024 15:03
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
Status: Internal
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants